Salvage procedures for infected penile implants: A comprehensive review and analysis of functional outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The salvage procedure for infected penile implants (IPs) has been a subject of interest since its inception in the late 1980s, yet its widespread adoption remains limited. The aim of this study was to realize a systematic literature review to provide a comprehensive analysis of salvage techniques for IPs and assess their efficacy, specifically focusing on functional success. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted using PubMed, employing Mesh terms related to penile prosthesis, penile implant, infection, and salvage procedures. Articles in French or English were considered for the final analysis, with exclusion of literature reviews. RESULTS: Fifteen articles detailing various salvage techniques for IPs were identified. Mulcahy's initial technique was described in 1996, and consisted of complete removal of infected components, extensive lavage, and subsequent replacement with a similar implant. Success rates ranged from 80% to 100%, with emerging trends favoring the use of malleable implants during salvage. Unfortunately, functional data remained limited. When salvage penile prosthesis placement involved a malleable prosthesis, between 20% and 33% of patients underwent conversion to hydraulic prosthesis. CONCLUSION: The salvage procedure for infected penile implants is a reliable method, with success rates surpassing 80%. The need for comparative studies assessing the type of implant used during salvage is required to tailor conservative management strategies for optimal patient outcomes. Finally, few data have been published regarding subsequent conversions from malleable penile implants to hydraulic penile implants after salvage.

Current treatment options for erectile dysfunction in kidney transplant recipients.

INTRODUCTION: Erectile dysfunction (ED) and kidney dysfunction share common risk factors linked to conditions involving endothelial impairment, such as coronary artery disease, dyslipidemia, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, smoking, and obesity. Men with chronic kidney disease experience a high incidence and prevalence of ED. While a functional renal graft can alleviate the issue for some patients, a significant portion of recipients still experience ED (20%-50%). OBJECTIVES: This narrative review describes the variety of current treatments modalities on ED in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) and their clinical outcomes. METHODS: MEDLINE, Web of Science, PubMed, and Google Scholar were used to find eligible articles pertaining to the treatment options of ED in KTRs. A total of 64 articles were evaluated. RESULTS: In KTRs, ED stems from a multifaceted etiology: anxiety, drug side effects, interference with penile vascularity, or the response of cavernosal muscle to neurotransmitters, along with changes in the endocrine milieu. A diverse range of treatments to restore erectile function has proven to be safe and effective for KTRs. Options include drug therapy, surgical interventions, intracavernosal injection therapies, vacuum erection devices, and extracorporeal shockwave therapy. CONCLUSION: The initial treatment approach may involve the use of a phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors at a low dosage, especially if testosterone-circulating levels align with the diagnosis of hypogonadism. The consideration of a combination therapy involving testosterone and phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors should be contemplated due to the associated beneficial effects. Extracorporeal shockwave therapy has shown positive short-term clinical and physiological effects on erectile function in patients who did not respond to first-line treatments, resulting in spontaneous erections sufficient for sexual penetration in 50% of cases. Penile implants should be considered as third-line options based on specific patient needs and compliance with clinical conditions.

Penile prosthesis in priapism: a systematic review of outcomes and complications.

Background: Priapism is a rare condition characterized by persistent erection of the penis that lasts more than 4 hours in the absence of sexual stimulation and is associated with significant morbidity and complications, including erectile dysfunction and penile fibrosis. Surgical management of priapism can be extremely challenging. We herein provide a comprehensive review that aims to evaluate the role of penile prosthesis (PP) implantation in the management of priapism. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed using the following databases: PubMed, Embase, and Scopus to identify studies that evaluated the effectiveness of PP implantation in treating priapism and the long-term complications, outcomes, and patients' satisfaction rate. Results: Out of 717 English-language studies published between 2002 and 2022, 17 were chosen for this review. Majority of patients had a malleable PP (MPP) implant, either early or delayed after the priapism episode. Early placement (EP) of PP is widely defined between studies ranging from less than 72 hours, within 1 week, and within 3 weeks. Most common causes of priapism were sickle cell anemia (SCA), medication-induced, and idiopathic. Studies show a higher satisfaction rate ranging between 80% and 100%, with sexual intercourse achievement ranging between 64.2% and 100%. Based on the GRADE system, included studies rated as very low quality of evidence. Commonly reported complications that arise after PP procedures, include device infection, erosion, curvature, and mechanical malfunction, such as auto-inflation. Conclusions: PP can be an effective treatment option for priapism, particularly in cases of ischemic priapism lasting more than 36 hours or recurrent priapism that is medically refractory. However, due to the very low quality of evidence, larger, well-designed studies are warranted where long-term outcomes, patients' satisfaction, and complications following priapism-related PP implantation are measured as endpoints.

Narrative review of immediate salvage for penile prosthesis infection.

Background and Objective: Implantation of a penile prosthesis is a reliable option for men with erectile dysfunction (ED) refractory to less invasive therapies. While the frequency of penile prosthesis infections have decreased, they remain a devastating complication. Herein we discuss why immediate salvage surgery is an essential technique for the management of implant infections. We will also describe the relevant advancements to this technique. Methods: We conducted a narrative review via computer based search of PubMed for all relevant articles on penile prosthesis infection management, including guidelines, case series, reviews, and expert opinions. Search terms used included: "inflatable penile prosthesis", "IPP", "penile prosthesis", "salvage", "treatment", "delayed", "immediate". Only English peer-reviewed publications were included. Key Content and Findings: Historically, patients who presented with penile prosthesis infections were exclusively managed with complete removal of the prosthesis without replacement. Although this strategy is safe, it hastens immediate ED and corporal fibrosis, resulting in loss of penile length and increased difficulty with subsequent prosthesis replacement. Previous case series have reported successful treatment of localized penile prosthesis infections with nonsurgical treatment, but the role of conservative treatment remains limited. The current standard of immediate salvage entails removal of the infected prosthesis and washout followed by immediate replacement with a new penile prosthesis. This technique has been demonstrated to be safe and effective, thus allowing patients to resume intercourse and maintain penile length. Conclusions: Immediate salvage surgery is safe and effective, and has emerged as the preferred strategy for the management of most patients with a penile prosthesis infection.

Overcoming barriers to immediate penile implant salvage surgery: a narrative review.

Background and Objective: Since immediate salvage (IS) surgery for infected penile prosthesis (PP) was introduced nearly 30 years ago, an abundance of evidence has emerged in support of its use. IS remains underutilized by the modern urologist despite its distinct advantages. While some medical literature proposes reasons for the underuse of IS, no comprehensive review attempts to address the numerous factors limiting its implementation. Our objective is to analyze the barriers to IS surgery for infected PP with the goal of expanding utilization of this technique through a practical and standardized approach for treating urologists. Methods: A narrative review of available English, peer-reviewed, medical literature relevant to the barriers to IS was completed. Searches were expanded to include literature from surgical specialties in general if hypothesized barriers were incompletely described in available PP publications. Key Content and Findings: The major barriers that are likely contributing to the low rates of IS for PP surgery can be broadly classified into three major categories: institutional/systemic, medical/surgical, and patient preference. Institutional/systemically driven barriers include surgeon comfort with PP surgery, low national availability of urologists, inaccessibility of prosthetics or critical ancillary staff at the time of patient presentation and limited operating room (OR) access. Medical/surgical barriers primarily relate to reinfection fears, perceived contraindications to IS, and overall patient stability at the time of presentation. Patient preference factors inhibiting IS involve loss of trust in the medical team, psychosocial distress, dissatisfaction with the initial device prior to infection and anxiety regarding postoperative recovery. Many of the identified barriers can be overcome with increased surgical training, improved patient and surgeon understanding of PP infection, or precautionary planning. Conclusions: Of the factors that contribute to low utilization of IS, many are misunderstood or unknown. Recognition of these barriers may equip urologists to provide better care to patients with prosthesis infection.

A contemporary systematic review of penile lengthening procedures with penile prosthesis.

Background: Penile prosthetic devices are the standard treatment for erectile dysfunction (ED) after failure of maximum medical therapy and conservative options. Several penile lengthening procedures (PLPs) can be performed concurrently with penile prosthesis (PP) insertion in patients with severe ED, penile shortening, and/or Peyronie's disease to help combat negative emotional and psychological concerns from penile length loss with penile prosthetic device placement. Methods: An extensive, systematic literature review of the various pre-, intra-, and post-operative techniques that can be applied to preserve, restore or enhance penile length at the time of penile prosthetic implantation. Results: Numerous pre-operative and post-operative inflation protocols exists with vacuum erection devices and penile traction therapy. Intraoperative surgical techniques include cavernosal sparing and channeling without dilatation, subcoronal incision with circumferential penile degloving and grafting, the sliding technique, the modified sliding technique, the multiple-slit technique, the tunical expansion procedure (TEP), modified TEP, and the auxetic expansion procedure. These approaches can be meaningful to restore and/or preserve length for patients undergoing PP insertion. Conclusions: PLPs can be performed by surgeons who have extensive penile reconstruction experience and have been trained to do these procedures, as there is significant risk to the patient and limitations to what can be expected. Each patient must be counseled in detail about the risks and benefits of these procedures and have their expectations managed as the average postoperative penile length recovery is around 3 cm and can range from 0-4.0 cm. Future research is needed to identify the appropriate candidate for each approach, and how much length gain the patient can expect.

Use of Soft Penile Prosthesis in Grafting Surgery for Peyronie's Disease and Mild Erectile Dysfunction: Still an Option?

BACKGROUND: Plaque incision and grafting (PEG) is a primary surgical therapy for severe penile curvature in Peyronie's disease (PD); However, it can increase the risk of erectile dysfunction (ED), particularly in patients with pre-operative mild ED. Soft penile prosthesis (SPP) implantation is a viable treatment option in such cases. This study aims to compare the outcomes of PEG-only approach to PEG plus SPP implantation. METHODS: Between 2010 and 2019, 32 patients with PD and mild ED (5-item version of the International Index of Erectile Function scores: 17-21) underwent PEG surgery. Two groups were defined based on the surgery type: PEG-only and PEG plus SPP. The long-term outcomes included correction of penile bending, erection quality, intercourse ability, penile length and sensitivity. The overall satisfaction and impact of surgery on sexual activity and quality of life were also assessed. RESULTS: Of the 32 patients, 13 (40.6%) underwent PEG-only surgery, whereas 19 (59.4%) underwent PEG plus SPP. No significant differences were noted between the groups regarding pre-operative characteristics (all p > 0.1) or intra- and post-operative complication rates (all p > 0.2). The median patch area was larger in the PEG-only group (28 cm2 vs. 16.2 cm2; p = 0.001), whereas patients in the PEG plus SPP group were more likely to receive a single patch implant (100% vs. 53.8%; p < 0.001). The penile length increased in 18 patients (61.6%), with significant differences between the two groups (30% vs. 81.2%; p = 0.03). Overall, 14 patients (53.8%) reported greater satisfaction with their sexual life post-operatively, with comparable rates between the groups (p = 0.2). No significant differences were found in the post-operative 5-item version of the International Index of Erectile Function scores or severe post-operative ED (all p > 0.5). CONCLUSIONS: SPP placement during corporoplasty in patients with mild ED is safe and feasible, and it may be a suitable option for patients uncertain about inflatable prosthesis placement. The use of SPP resulted in longer penile lengths and necessitated smaller grafts. However, further data are required to understand the long-term clinical implications of this approach.

Combination of pregabalin and Amitriptyline in management of chronic idiopathic pain following penile prosthesis implantation: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic post-penile prosthesis pain is de novo pain persisting > 2 months post-operatively. This pain is inadequately reported, poorly understood and undermanaged. The purpose of this current pilot study was to improvise a medical approach to alleviate the condition and assess the combination of Pregabalin and Amitriptyline in its management. RESULTS: The study enrolled 9 patients complaining of idiopathic penile, pelvic, or scrotal pain persisting > 2 months after penile prosthesis implantation. Patients were prescribed pregabalin 75mg/12h (escalated after 1 week to 150mg/12h upon demand) and Amitriptyline 25mg once daily for 3 months. The pain was reassessed after 10, 30 and 100 days. The dose of pregabalin required and the side effects of the medication were noted. Findings revealed a significant decrease in pain duration (p = 0.007), frequency (p < 0.001), and intensity (p < 0.001); in glanular (p = 0.008), shaft pain (p = 0.046) but not scrotal (p = 0.112). Moreover, a significant decrease was found in sharp pain (p = 0.003) and pain aggravated by touch (p = 0.008) but not aching pain (p = 0.277). Additionally, significant improvement was reported in QoL (p < 0.001) and dose escalation of pregabalin to 150mg/12h was required in only 1 case (11%). CONCLUSION: The combination of pregabalin and amitriptyline is very effective in the management of chronic idiopathic pain following penile prosthesis implantation. However, due to the ambiguity and lack of reporting of the condition, we recommend a multicentric contribution to acknowledge the condition, and weigh its prevalence accurately, whilst evaluating the efficacy of our approach. This study received ethical approval from Ain Shams University Research Ethics Committee (REC) FWA 000017585, on 04/13/2023 (REC-FMASU@med.asu.edu.eg). TRIAL REGISTRATION: no FMASU R98/2023.

RéSUMé: CONTEXTE: La douleur chronique survenant après l'implantation d'une prothèse pénienne est une douleur de novo qui persiste plus de 2 mois après la chirurgie. Cette douleur est mal rapportée, mal comprise et mal gérée. L'objectif de cette étude pilote était d'improviser une approche médicale pour soulager cette douleur, et d'évaluer l'association de la prégabaline et de l'amitriptyline dans sa prise en charge. RéSULTATS: L'étude a inclut 9 patients se plaignant de douleurs idiopathiques au pénis, au bassin ou au scrotum, persistantes depuis plus de 2 mois après l'implantation d'une prothèse pénienne. Les patients se sont vu prescrire 75 mg/12 h de prégabaline (augmenté après 1 semaine à 150 mg/12 h sur demande) et 25 mg d'amitriptyline une fois par jour, pendant 3 mois. La douleur a été réévaluée après 10, 30 et 100 jours. La dose de prégabaline requise et les effets secondaires du médicament ont été notés. Les résultats ont montré une diminution significative de la durée de la douleur (p = 0,007), de sa fréquence (p < 0,001) et de son intensité (p < 0,001), au niveau du gland (p = 0,008), de la verge (p = 0,046) mais pas du scrotum (p = 0,112). De plus, une diminution significative a été observée en ce qui concerne la douleur vive (p = 0,003) et la douleur aggravée par le toucher (p = 0,008), mais pas la douleur aigüe (p = 0,277). Enfin, une amélioration significative de la qualité de vie (p < 0,001) a été rapportée et l'augmentation de la dose de prégabaline à 150 mg/12 h ne s'est avéré nécessaire que dans 1 cas (11 %). CONCLUSION: L'association de la prégabaline et de l'amitriptyline est très efficace dans la prise en charge de la douleur chronique idiopathique suite à l'implantation d'une prothèse pénienne. Cependant, en raison de l'ambiguïté et de l'absence de déclaration de la maladie, nous recommandons la mise en place d'une contribution multicentrique pour reconnaître la maladie et évaluer sa prévalence avec précision, tout en évaluant l'efficacité de notre approche. Cette étude a reçu l'approbation éthique du Comité d'éthique de la recherche (CER) de l'Université Ain Shams 44 FWA 000017585, le 13/04/2023 (REC46 FMASU@med.asu.edu.eg). N° D'ENREGISTREMENT DE L'ESSAI: FMASU R98/2023.

Cosmetic penile enhancement procedures: an SMSNA position statement.

BACKGROUND: Penile cosmetic enhancement procedures have been performed for many years with varying success. However, they have historically been relegated to niche areas of sexual medicine, with limited data, and have not achieved mainstream adoption. More recently, the topic has been increasingly discussed within academic congresses due to availability of novel techniques, therapies, and procedures. Given their distinctive nature, the Sexual Medicine Society of North America (SMSNA) felt that it was pertinent to develop formal position statements to help guide both patients and sexual medicine providers on the current state of the scientific literature and to give recommendations for future research. AIM: The study sought to provide an evidence-based set of recommendations for injection and surgical procedures designed to lengthen, augment, or otherwise cosmetically enhance the penis. METHODS: A review was performed of all scientific literature listed in PubMed from inception through December 2023 relating to penile cosmetic enhancement procedures. Only invasive (injection/surgery) therapies were included due to their distinct risk-benefit profile compared with more conservative treatments (eg, vacuum erection devices, penile traction devices). Similar therapies were categorized, with pertinent data summarized and used to help create relevant position statements. All statements were expert opinion only and were based on analyses of the potential risks and benefits of the specific therapies. OUTCOMES: A total of 6 position statements were issued relating to 5 distinct sexual medicine cosmetic enhancement procedures. RESULTS: A consensus opinion was reached by SMSNA leadership on the state of injection/surgical penile cosmetic enhancement procedures as of 2024. Key topic areas addressed included injectable soft tissue fillers, suspensory ligament division, graft-and-flap procedures, silicone sleeve implants, and sliding/slicing techniques. Distinct recommendations were tailored to each therapy and were based solely on the current state of the literature. It is anticipated that future studies will further inform position statements and will lead to ongoing modifications. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The current position statements provide both patients and clinicians evidence-based, expert recommendations on best practices relating to penile cosmetic enhancement procedures. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: Strengths include the use of an expert panel of sexual medicine clinicians, consensus design, and summary of existing literature. Limitations include expert opinion and limited research on the topic. CONCLUSION: The current SMSNA position statements provide evidence-based, consensus opinions on the appropriate role for penile augmentation and cosmetic procedures in 2024.

Risk factors for penile prosthesis infection: An umbrella review and meta-analysis.

Background: As available data on implantation-related infections is contradictory, the aim was to identify the predictors of penile prosthesis infection. Methods: We performed an umbrella review and meta-analysis including systematic reviews with extractable data. Literature search was done in two databases: PubMed and Google Scholar. The participants were males with erectile dysfunction regardless of etiology who underwent penile implant surgery. Using a standardized form, three trained researchers reviewed each reference (systematic review) by title and abstract. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4.1 (RevMan® 5.4.1). Results: A total of 78 systematic reviews were identified with the search strategies. Of these, 35 duplicates were removed. Thirty-seven full-text reviews were then excluded after revision. Six systematic reviews with a total of 271,226 patients (156,553 patients in the study group and 114,673 patients in the control group) were included in the meta-analysis. The analysis identified various predictors of adverse outcomes (infection). Among them were glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and different characteristics of penile implants. Conclusions: The systematic review and meta-analysis revealed significant risk factors/predictors of penile prosthesis infection: glycated hemoglobin levels; reoperation, and two predictors associated with the type of penile prosthesis. The weighted mean HbA1c levels of patients with and without infections were 8.37% and 7.17% respectively. The OR was as follows: first surgery/revision OR 0.36 (95% CI 0.29-0.45); antibiotic-coated/non-coated prosthesis OR 0.47 (95% CI 0.31-0.72); malleable/inflatable prosthesis OR 3.51 (95% CI 1.41-8.74).

Management of the anatomically complex penile implant candidate through an infrapubic incision: a review of surgical techniques and benefits.

This article provides a comprehensive discussion of 3-piece inflatable penile implant surgery when performed through an infrapubic approach in patients presenting with challenging anatomy or corporal fibrosis. The infrapubic approach is one of the primary approaches for inflatable device placement with excellent long-term functional outcomes. While the literature is rich in descriptions of infrapubic placement in the primary, uncomplicated setting, its role in the management of complex patients presenting to centers of excellence is less elucidated. In uncomplicated cases, the infrapubic approach offers several theoretical advantages including shorter operative time and quicker return to sexual function. In addition to describing specific details of our infrapubic technique and perioperative management, I discuss scenarios in which an infrapubic approach may allow for better exposure for correction of dorsal deformity, facilitate secondary surgical maneuvers such as suprapubic lipectomy, or protect existing incontinence prosthetics already in place. Specific technique and surgical pearls from our prosthetic center of excellence are reviewed for each of these challenging scenarios. Ultimately, prosthetic surgeons should be adept at placing, revising, and removing devices through both approaches so that various forms of anatomical deformity and device failures can be addressed proficiently. In addition to my own clinical reflections, a critical review was performed using the Medline database to support our statements.

Addressing the need for preclinical study of penile prosthesis infection: a new animal model and narrative review.

Background and Objective: Erectile dysfunction (ED) is a common condition in men, and many patients refractory to conservative treatment may undergo penile prostheses (PPs) placement. The primary concern following PP implantation is device infection. Although antibiotic and hydrophilic coatings have reduced the incidence of inflatable PP (IPP) infections, there remains room for improvement. Optimization of PP outcomes requires a practical in vivo model to better understand mechanisms of infection and to test new infection control strategies. We aimed to describe a new rabbit model which contains a functional IPP and review previously reported animal PP models. Methods: An IPP was placed into rabbit flanks and cycled for functionality testing. Rabbits were evaluated for signs of pain and distress over 14 days. Separately, narrative review methodology was utilized to search the PubMed and Scopus databases for all publications through March 21, 2023, which studied PP within an in vivo setting. Three independent reviewers ultimately selected 12 papers from 1992-2021 for inclusion. Key Content and Findings: Several animal studies highlighted the initial functionality or feasibility of devices for ED before their introduction in the clinical setting. There are several subsequent studies aimed at optimizing the type of antibiotic use or coating material using segments of PP material in an in vivo setting. However, the literature lacks a contemporary animal model containing a functional IPP. Our novel rabbit model offers a safe, practical way to implant a functioning IPP and investigate new perioperative infection prevention and treatment strategies before trials in the clinical setting. Conclusions: Animal models have played a key role in testing medical devices, including PPs, prior to their clinical introduction. Our review uncovered no modern animal studies involving placement of a functional PP. A new animal model can facilitate study of evolving microorganism profiles, novel methods to enhance antibiotic delivery, and proposed treatment options.

Early vs delayed insertion of penile prosthesis in patients with refractory priapism: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Refractory priapism, characterized by persistent and prolonged painful erections despite initial treatment maneuvers, can significantly impair erectile function secondary to ischemia-induced corporal tissue fibrosis. These patients will likely require subsequent penile prosthesis (PP) surgery to regain sexual activity, yet consensus regarding the optimal timing of implantation remains lacking. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate and compare the clinical outcomes associated with early vs delayed PP implantation in individuals with priapism-induced erectile dysfunction (ED). METHODS: We included studies that focused on refractory priapism leading to ED and its management with PP implantation. We assessed cohort study bias with a risk-of-bias tool and case series bias with the modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) were calculated by a fixed-effect model. RESULTS: We included 9 studies, comprising 4 cohort studies and 5 case series, involving a total of 278 patients. Total complications were higher in the delayed group (OR, 4.16; 95% CI, 2.77-6.26). Fibrosis was significantly more pronounced in the delayed group (OR, 118.18; 95% CI, 20.06-696.32). The odds of erosion, infections, and penile injury did not show statistically significant differences between the groups (OR, 2.52 [95% CI, 0.67-9.49], 0.89 [0.38-2.10], 1.83 [0.79-4.26], respectively). Patients' satisfaction resulted in a pooled OR of 0.15 (95% CI, 0.04-0.49) in favor of the early PP insertion group. CONCLUSION: The results from this study favor an early approach to ED (within 30 days) following ischemic priapism. However, it is important to consider patients' preferences, values, and psychological factors to make an informed decision.

Clinical Practice Patterns for Surgical Shunts and Penile Prosthesis Placement in Men With Priapism: A Retrospective Large Claims Database Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to assess the rates of surgical shunting and prosthesis placement for acute ischemic priapism using a large multi-institutional claims database. METHODS: A US claims database network (TriNetX Diamond Network) was queried from 2010 to 2020. We constructed a cohort of men ages ≥ 16 years who (1) had a diagnosis of priapism and (2) underwent an irrigation of the corpora cavernosa for priapism. We assessed the number of men who then had a surgical penile shunt or penile prosthesis placement. Demographics, time to surgical procedure, and order of procedures were collected. RESULTS: A total of 6392 men were identified with the diagnosis of priapism and the procedure of corpora cavernosal irrigation. Of these men, 693 (11%) proceeded to surgical shunt. One hundred forty-four men (2%) underwent initial penile prosthesis placement. Of the men undergoing initial penile prosthesis, only 17 of 144 (12%) cases occurred within the first month of corpora cavernosal irrigation. Finally, when assessing choice of initial shunts vs initial penile prosthesis before and after 2015, overall rates of initial shunt (10.0% vs 8.5%, P < .0001) and initial prosthesis (3.1% vs 2.1%, P < .0001) were lower after 2015 when compared with rates prior to 2015. CONCLUSIONS: In this US claims-based analysis of men presenting with ischemic priapism and treated with initial irrigation, a small percentage (11%) of men went on to receive surgical shunting, and only 2% received an initial prosthesis. Men receiving initial prostheses were more likely to have more comorbidities, and overall surgical management of priapism has decreased over time.

Development and validation of 3-dimensional simulators for penile prosthesis surgery.

BACKGROUND: The acquisition of skills in penile prosthesis surgery has many limitations mainly due to the absence of simulators and models for training. Three-dimensional (3D) printed models can be utilized for surgical simulations, as they provide an opportunity to practice before entering the operating room and provide better understanding of the surgical approach. AIM: This study aimed to evaluate and validate a 3D model of human male genitalia for penile prosthesis surgery. METHODS: This study included 3 evaluation and validation stages. The first stage involved verification of the 3D prototype model for anatomic landmarks compared with a cadaveric pelvis. The second stage involved validation of the improved model for anatomic accuracy and teaching purposes with the Rochester evaluation score. The third stage comprised validation of the suitability of the 3D prototype model as a surgical simulator and for skill acquisition. The third stage was performed at 3 centers using a modified version of a pre-existing, validated questionnaire and correlated with the Rochester evaluation score. OUTCOME: We sought to determine the suitability of 3D model for training in penile prosthesis surgery in comparison with the available cadaveric model. RESULTS: The evaluation revealed a high Pearson correlation coefficient (0.86) between questions of the Rochester evaluation score and modified validated questionnaire. The 3D model scored 4.33 ± 0.57 (on a Likert scale from 1 to 5) regarding replication of the relevant human anatomy for the penile prosthesis surgery procedure. The 3D model scored 4.33 ± 0.57 (on a Likert scale from 1 to 5) regarding its ability to improve technical skills, teach and practice the procedure, and assess a surgeon's ability. Furthermore, the experts stated that compared with the cadaver, the 3D model presented greater ethical suitability, reduced costs, and easier accessibility. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: A validated 3D model is a suitable alternative for penile prosthesis surgery training. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: This is the first validated 3D hydrogel model for penile prosthesis surgery teaching and training that experts consider suitable for skill acquisition. Because specific validated guidelines and questionnaires for the validation and verifications of 3D simulators for penile surgery are not available, a modified questionnaire was used. CONCLUSION: The current 3D model for penile prosthesis surgery shows promising results regarding anatomic properties and suitability to train surgeons to perform penile implant surgery. The possibility of having an ethical, easy-to-use model with lower costs and limited consequences for the environment is encouraging for further development of the models.

Does climate impact inflatable penile prosthesis infection (IPP) risk? Assessment of temperature and dew point on IPP infections.

BACKGROUND: Variations in climate have been associated with a greater risk of surgical site infections, urinary tract infections, and changes in the skin microbiome; however, limited data exist on the impact of climate on inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) infections. AIM: We sought to evaluate the impact of climate on the risk of IPP infections in a large international, multicenter cohort. METHODS: We performed a multi-institutional, retrospective study of patients undergoing IPP surgery. We then evaluated whether the month or season, during which surgery was performed, affected device infections. Implant infections were defined as infections requiring device explantation. A univariate logistic regression analysis was undertaken. OUTCOMES: Our primary outcome was implant infection. RESULTS: A total of 5289 patients with a mean age of 62.2 ± 10.8 years received IPP placement. There was a fairly even distribution of implants performed in each season. A total of 103 (1.9%) infections were recorded. There were 32 (31.1%) IPP infections in patients who underwent surgery in the summer, followed by 28 (27.2%) in the winter, 26 (25.2%) in the spring, and 17 (16.5%) in the fall. No statistically significant differences were recorded in terms of season (P = .19) and month (P = .29). The mean daily temperature (P = .43), dew point (P = .43), and humidity (P = .92) at the time of IPP placement was not associated with infection. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: These findings provide reassurance to prosthetic urologists that infection reduction strategies do not need to be tailored to local climate. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: Climate data were not directly recorded for each hospital, but rather based on the monthly averages in the city where the surgery was performed. CONCLUSION: The climate at time of IPP placement and time of year of surgery is not associated with IPP infection risk.

Satisfaction assessment study in patients (and their partners) with/without Peyronie's disease and penile prosthesis implantation.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Among the many treatments for erectile dysfunction, implantation of a penile prosthesis has been associated with high patient satisfaction rates. However, patients with coexistent Peyronie's disease (PD) and refractory erectile dysfunction and/or severe deformities may show different results. The aim of our study was to assess and to compare the level of satisfaction, with an inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP), in men with/without coexistent PD. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A survey study based on a five-item satisfaction questionnaire was submitted to all those live patients implanted in the period 1992-2022 at our center (n = 570) and their partners. Ninety-two percent of implants were inflatable devices. Surgeries were mainly performed by two surgeons. The main outcome measure used was the level of patient and partner satisfaction with sexual intercourse after IPP. RESULTS: Of the 570 eligible patients, 479 (84%) completed the survey (393 Non-PD: GROUP 1; 70 non-complex PD-Group 2; 16 complex PD). Eighty-six per cent of patients in Group 1 reported satisfactory sexual intercourse (very or moderately satisfied). Non-complex PD implanted patients (Group 2) reported a global 81% satisfactory sexual intercourse (very or moderately satisfied) (p > 0.05). However, when we evaluated the PD subgroup of patients with severe PD who require incision/excision/grafting at the time of implant (Group 3: n = 20), only 61% reported satisfactory sexual intercourse (p < 0.01) with predominance of moderately satisfied patients over very satisfied: 78% vs. 22%). Additionally, 84% (Group 1), 80% (Group 2) and 54% (Group 3) of partners reported satisfactory intercourses, respectively (p < 0.01). Overall, 84% of Group 1 implants and 79% of Group 2 reported that they would undergo the procedure again if the IPP failed (p > 0.05; ns). Only 50% of Group 3 patients would do it again. With regard to cosmetic aspects, 48% of the Group 3 implant reported penile shortness or soft glans as the main causes of their dissatisfaction. Only 2.4% of total PP patients expressed difficulty in manipulating the device. CONCLUSION: The presence of PD alone may not impact PP patient and partner satisfaction, but patients with more severe baseline deformity who require incision/grafting may be less satisfied with outcomes including penile length and glans sensation.

Penile fibrosis-still scarring urologists today: a narrative review.

Background and Objective: Implantation of penile prosthesis (PP) into scarred and fibrotic corpora can be a difficult challenge. In this review article, we provide a review of penile fibrosis, discuss current medical and surgical management and summarize preventative strategies. Methods: In this study, we searched PubMed between the years 2000-2023 for publications with search strategy: "penile fibrosis" OR "scarred corpora" OR "fibrosed corpora". Key Content and Findings: This search returned a total of 137 articles. We examine the evidence for preoperative patient evaluation and penile ultrasound (US), oral phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors, pentoxifylline, and L-arginine, vacuum device therapy and the use of surgical approaches and tools in the context of complex penile fibrosis cases. Severe penile fibrosis is most associated with priapism and infection. Estimating the degree of fibrosis via preoperative US may help set realistic patient expectations. Phosphodiesterase inhibitors and L-arginine reduce fibrosis in animal models however their impact in humans remains unclear despite theoretical advantage for their use. Vacuum device therapy may preserve penile length following priapism and infected PP cases. The use of Coloplast Narrow-Based or AMS-700 CXR implants are used primarily for severe fibrosis. Various surgical excisional/incisional techniques, the Carrion-Rossello, Mooreville Uramix cavernotomes and reverse cutting scissors are all options, and their use varies from case to case. Finally, prevention of penile fibrosis in patients with history of penile implant infection and the safety of early implantation of a penile implant in patients with refractory priapism is encouraged. Conclusions: The management of penile fibrosis remains a challenge but there are multiple options to assist clinicians. Complex cases should be managed and studied at high volume centers.

Recent technological development of penile prosthesis: a literature review.

Background and Objective: In contemporary Urology, the gold standard for treatment of erectile dysfunction refractory to medical therapy has been implantation with a penile prosthesis. The past 40 years has witnessed evolutions in technology and surgical techniques, which have led to increased patient satisfaction rates and decreased complication and infection rates. This review is an update to a prior review article that evaluates these advancements in the context of patient satisfaction and different rates of complications following surgeries. In addition, the review compares malleable and inflatable prostheses with regard to infection rate, mechanical failure rate, and erosion rate. Methods: A literature search was conducted using Medline and Google Scholar to examine papers from 1973 to the present day. Keywords, such as, "penile prosthesis surgery", "malleable penile prosthesis", "inflatable penile prosthesis", "two-piece Inflatable Penile Prosthesis (IPP)", and "three-piece IPP" were utilized during the search. A total of 76 papers were included, and all were in English. Key Content and Findings: Studies on the latest models of each of the three prostheses (malleable, two-piece IPP, three-piece IPP) revealed patient satisfaction ratings at or above 75%. Both types of IPPs were associated with greater satisfaction and lower erosion rates while malleable prostheses were associated with lower mechanical failure rates. Although no significant differences in infection rates were noted between the prosthesis types, a history of diabetes, obesity, and smoking were predictive of infection events. Conclusions: The three-piece IPP, if indicated for a suitable patient, is generally accepted as the best type of prosthesis given its biological mimicry to an erect human penis.